Legal Representation For Fetus Of Brain-Dead Women, Or The Next Step In “Personhood”

We’ll begin this post with a quick definition of Personhood Laws. (I’m sure there are better definitions, but we’ll go with this one.)

Personhood laws are laws designed to extend the legal concept of “personhood” to pre-born humans. Specifically, these laws give legal status as a person to any fertilized human egg, from conception until birth. This includes the zygote before it has implanted, and according to medical science, implantation is the beginning of a pregnancy.

BTW, I’m not comfortable with the term pre-born, but if you are then why not use the term pre-dead for the rest of us? Although that could make murder cases tricky. Hey, the victim was going to be dead in the future!

We’ve seen Personhood on the ballot, and we’ve seen it fail in some pretty conservative states. That doesn’t mean it’s going away. It just means the pro-Personhood contingent has switched tactics. They will chip away at the fringes of legalized abortion and they will use the most vulnerable among us.

The proposal by Rep. Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth, would appoint a representative to speak on behalf of the fetus if a pregnant woman is declared brain-dead or otherwise permanently incapacitated. Krause is working with legislative bill-drafters and has yet to introduce a specific measure in the House.

“You’ll hear what the family wants, and you’ll also give the pre-born child a chance to have a voice in court at that same time,” Krause said. “The judge weighs everything and he or she makes their decision based on that.”

Please notice how the pregnant, brain-dead and/or permanently incapacitated woman’s wishes aren’t considered. Know what else isn’t considered? Who picks up the bill for a brain-dead pregnant woman. Bobby Jindal has signed into law a similar bill where those closest to the heartbreaking situation lose their voice.

And, make no mistake, the case Rep. Krause is basing his proposal on has more in common with a horror film.

A blood clot caused Muñoz, 33, to collapse at her Haltom City home in November 2013. Two scans taken at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth revealed that she was brain-dead. Her family immediately asked the hospital to remove her from life support, as her husband said she would have wanted. Doctors refused, saying that because she was 14 weeks pregnant, state law compelled them to keep her alive.

[…]

The family said Muñoz told them she wouldn’t want to be sustained by life support before she died. John Peter Smith officials argued that the Texas Advance Directives Act applied to the case. It states that “a person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment” from a pregnant patient.

[…]

Machado said after about a month, the smell of her daughter’s deteriorating body made it difficult to visit. Physically, stiffness had set in, and her fingers broke when her mother tried to hold her hand.

Doctors detected physical disfigurements and suspected brain damage in the fetus. Muñoz was given injections to restart her heart after it repeatedly stopped, and Machado said the combination of chemicals and a lack of oxygen after her collapse probably doomed the fetus to abnormalities it could not survive.
(emphasis mine because this needs to be emphasized)

There was a similar case in Ireland. I’ll let the Irish specialist sum up this ghoulish situation:

Earlier, a specialist in intensive care, Dr Brian Marsh, said the view of medical science was that the woman was now a “corpse”.

The reality of these situations (decomposing dead bodies?) is gruesome. It’s also what actually happens. The image of a serene “sleeping” woman with a rounded belly isn’t the truth. The truth is ghastly. So, if you want to argue for keeping pregnant, brain-dead woman alive, you had better address what that entails.

But the point of this proposal isn’t really about brain-dead, pregnant women. It’s about establishing the fetus as a person with legal rights. And it’s no coincidence that they’ve targeted a women who can’t speak for themselves, or removed the voices of those closest to them. Anti-abortionists see this as a “gray” area. I’m hoping most people do not. Terry Shiavo wasn’t brain-dead, yet the country was upset with the court’s (and Jeb Bush’s) interference.

The other vulnerable group targeted is teenagers. The “pro-life” group tries to mask its Personhood goal behind parent rights, but if the parent isn’t informed then Alabama will appoint a fetus lawyer.

In Alabama, a minor who wants an abortion must have permission from a parent. The Supreme Court has ruled that states with such parental involvement requirements have to provide an out for young women who fear abuse or have have cut off contact with their parents. Alabama, like 36 other states, allows a minor to ask a judge for permission instead. The process, known as a judicial bypass, is meant to be swift, non-confrontational, and strictly confidential.

Alabama’s new law sets up time-consuming inquisitions. It requires district attorneys to cross-examine minors who want an abortion without parental approval, and it allows DAs and lawyers for fetuses to call witnesses to testify against the pregnant girls. Under this measure, a judge can adjourn bypass hearings for long periods of time, and a judge can disclose the minor’s identity to any person who “needs to know.” If a minor’s parents become aware of a bypass hearing—which the Supreme Court intended to be confidential—the law allows the parents to participate in the hearing and be represented by a lawyer.

Let’s take a look at the cross examination:

McPhillips: You say that you are aware that God instructed you not to kill your own baby, but you want to do it anyway? And are you saying here today that notwithstanding everything that you want to interfere with God’s plan for your baby?

Minor: I think that is between me and God.

McPhillips: And you are not concerned after you have had the abortion that some day you may wake up and say my gosh, what have I done to my own baby?

Minor: It may happen.

McPhillips: You are not worried about being haunted by this? Here you have the chance to save the life of your own baby…. And still you want to go ahead and snuff out the life of your own baby?

Minor: Yes.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the American Taliban – a Christian based group that uses their religious beliefs, and their god, as a guilt tripping bludgeon. Everyone who’s upset about ISIL and Islam… I’m not seeing much of an ideological split between them and American Christianists. These “pro-lifers” would support bringing back stoning harlots (harlots = any woman who likes or has sex) if they could get away with it. And, make no mistake, all of this is about sex. Don’t believe me? Then look up all the programs these “pro-life” people support after they’ve forced a birth. Pregnant Madonna morphs to Welfare Queen faster than the speed of light.

And take a look at another state that won’t consider a woman’s decision:

A Missouri Republican is pushing a bill that would allow a man who gets a woman pregnant to stop her from having an abortion. The measure would force a woman who wants an abortion to obtain written permission from the father first—unless she was the victim of “legitimate rape.”

Rick Brattin, a state representative from outside Kansas City, filed the bill on December 3 for next year’s legislative session. The proposed measure reads, “No abortion shall be performed or induced unless and until the father of the unborn child provides written, notarized consent to the abortion.”

The bill contains exceptions for women who become pregnant as the result of rape or incest—but there are caveats.

“Just like any rape, you have to report it, and you have to prove it,” Brattin tells Mother Jones. “So you couldn’t just go and say, ‘Oh yeah, I was raped’ and get an abortion. It has to be a legitimate rape.”

These guys just can’t let go of the “legitimate” rape stuff. West Virginia Rep. weighs in:

“Obviously rape is awful…” says Delegate Brian Kurcaba, R-Monongalia. “What is beautiful is the child is that could come from this.”

Obviously? It’s only obvious if you remove the rape. I guess all sperm is sacred. I swear, listening to these people reads like The Handmaid’s Tale.

We all know that “pro-lifers” and conservatives would outlaw abortion in a second. What we need to acknowledge is that Personhood bills, keeping dead, pregnant women on life support, putting pregnant teens under cross-examination by a fetus lawyer, and putting forth proposals to have the “father” have the final word in pregnancy are all part of the War Against Women – Women who are being denied (or trying to be denied) a voice in theses situations. Most women watch these situations closely because we realize forced birth not only affects our autonomy, it affects our economy. We really need to stop pretending that pregnancy isn’t an economic issue. It is.